This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Turkey
Pages: 1 ... 333435 3637 ... 270
1021
« on: February 08, 2017, 03:35:04 PM »
1022
« on: February 08, 2017, 03:30:26 PM »
I'm really concerned with how much they're using Zelda as a crutch. I'll definitely be holding off on buying the Switch for a few months at least.
1023
« on: February 07, 2017, 08:00:23 PM »
Heineken is awful.
1024
« on: February 07, 2017, 06:18:24 PM »
i have the proof somewhere in my calc II notebook saying .999999 (repeating) is 1. but i doubt class would bother even seeing it
Fuck that, I want to understand how I'm wrong. I feel like the guy from the "kg of bricks and feathers"
well i'll see if i can link the discord image.
Bro finally someone else that slashes their zeroes Do you put a line through your Z's and 7s too?
1025
« on: February 07, 2017, 05:34:24 PM »
Yes, an object moving at 99.9...% the speed of light is literally moving the speed of light. So, it's not possible to move that fast.
It would be immensely difficult to even approach that number, though, and it's important to note that an object's mass doesn't actually change with speed -- its relativistic mass does. Once you start dealing with FTL particles you're talking tachyons and other timey wimey stuff.
1026
« on: February 07, 2017, 04:22:00 PM »
Is this the virtue signalling that the angry man on YouTube warned me about?
Was it ever a legitimate term?
When it was an actual sociological term with a different meaning than today, yeah.
I'm afraid to google it for fear of becoming an MRA.
1027
« on: February 07, 2017, 04:01:15 PM »
Is this the virtue signalling that the angry man on YouTube warned me about?
Was it ever a legitimate term?
1028
« on: February 07, 2017, 03:37:42 PM »
Is this the virtue signalling that the angry man on YouTube warned me about?
1029
« on: February 07, 2017, 02:50:25 PM »
I'd say convenience and laziness differ on the metric of productivity. Take writing a paper for example: convenience is using a computer with a word processor rather than writing a paper by hand; laziness is using some software to compile known information in the format of a paper. Maybe not the best example, but it's the first that came to me and I think it illustrates my point.
1030
« on: February 07, 2017, 07:55:48 AM »
I only go for culturally and intellectually superior Asians.
1031
« on: February 06, 2017, 07:44:41 PM »
OoT and Wind Waker tie, though I suspect Majora's Mask would be in there if I could just get through the damn game.
Link's Awakening was my favorite gameboy game as a kid, though it felt less like Legend of Zelda and more like a generic Nintendo adventure game. Twilight Princess is also fantastic, but I really had to grind through Skyward Sword. The classic ones are also iconic, but they're so light on story it's difficult to compare to the others.
1032
« on: February 06, 2017, 07:31:17 PM »
god this is where my knowledge of calc would help but fuck calc 2 gave me cancer and ptsd to even bother explaining
Everyone says calc 3 is the hardest but calc 2 took me in a dark alley and fucked me like a little bitch.
what makes it so difficult
Might have been a combo of an overloaded schedule and the fact that I really struggle with memorizing new material. Calc 3 is derivatives and integrals, but in three dimensions. The application is different, but not so much the concepts.
1033
« on: February 06, 2017, 06:19:05 PM »
god this is where my knowledge of calc would help but fuck calc 2 gave me cancer and ptsd to even bother explaining
Everyone says calc 3 is the hardest but calc 2 took me in a dark alley and fucked me like a little bitch.
1034
« on: February 06, 2017, 03:21:29 PM »
I'm interested to hear what level of math has been competed by those who say 4 is greater, and vice versa.
It really doesn't matter. This is a matter of logic, not math.
The problem with your syllogism above is that you correlated 1.3 ̅ with 4/3, which is false.
They are exactly the same.
1035
« on: February 06, 2017, 03:09:25 PM »
I'm interested to hear what level of math has been competed by those who say 4 is greater, and vice versa.
1036
« on: February 06, 2017, 02:27:13 PM »
Somewhere, a priest with a fetish for altar boys and physical pain is very happy.
1037
« on: February 06, 2017, 02:26:07 PM »
4 is bigger than 3.9
Does 3*1.3... equal 3.9?
yes
1.3... = 4/3 3*(4/3) = 4 3*(1.3...) = 4 QED
1038
« on: February 06, 2017, 02:04:14 PM »
They're equal, right?
Spoiler Yeah, it's exactly like the .9...= 1 problem.
1039
« on: February 06, 2017, 01:59:42 PM »
4 is bigger than 3.9
Does 3*1.3... equal 3.9?
1040
« on: February 06, 2017, 01:40:45 PM »
Zack excels at ripping comics off panel-for-panel and making really atmospheric scenes. If it's an original story, I don't want him anywhere near it. Maybe as a director of cinematography, but not writing.
1041
« on: February 06, 2017, 01:35:17 PM »
Saw this on a practice GRE and thought it would piss off some people here.
Edit: Forgot the other two answers from the test.
1042
« on: February 06, 2017, 12:48:38 PM »
I really liked Gervais' rebuttal of the "science is just a different god" argument - that if you destroyed all religious texts they'd never resurface, but that if you destroyed all scientific texts, they'd eventually start to be rediscovered.
It's already happened once with the Medieval times to the Renaissance in Europe.
Is this referring to the popular conception of the dark ages? Because the idea that knowledge was somehow lost and then found again later is historically inaccurate. The supposed dark age didn't experience a decline in scholarship and rationality; the existence and characterization of the "dark age" is itself considered a popular myth.
In the Medieval period in Western Europe, technology was indeed lost that the Western Romans had, that later moved over to the East with Constantinople. That technology was reintroduced into the West at a much later date.
I'm not saying technology didn't advance, because obviously one only look at warfare to see that's not true. But it's silly to act like nothing was lost, especially something as simple as basic hygiene, and sewer systems. Obviously this is a problem when a massive empire collapses rapidly, and thus all trade, infrastructure, institutions and population declined rapidly. That led to fractured governments, and no one could really make the effort to do what Rome did for a long time.
We had to wait for Charlameme to actually promote schools and universities again, and promote education, as the only record keeping since Rome fell was Monks in churches.
Also can't forget the blatent fearmongering and hatred for ideas that challenged the churches as well. Wasn't called the dark ages so much because of what was lost, but because of the iron grip that shitty ideas and standards held over any scientific progress at the time.
This is also a myth. In the early middle ages, the church (various sects throughout east and west Europe) was the sole bastion of knowlege and literature following the fall of Rome until the reformation.
Can I know where you're getting that from? Because the last sources I know of on the dark ages point to most churches giving early scientists or people with progressive ideas a hard time on their views.
I'm not saying the churches didn't keep literature but I don't think it's unfair to say that they were probably secretive or selective with their usage of it. The churches in those eras didn't play so nice.
Well no, I don't keep a list of early middle ages history sources handy. A quick search of it should clear it up, and I'm on my phone. Could you be referring to times around the reformation, like the 15th/16th century? The church got pretty draconian around then.
1043
« on: February 06, 2017, 12:11:51 PM »
I really liked Gervais' rebuttal of the "science is just a different god" argument - that if you destroyed all religious texts they'd never resurface, but that if you destroyed all scientific texts, they'd eventually start to be rediscovered.
It's already happened once with the Medieval times to the Renaissance in Europe.
Is this referring to the popular conception of the dark ages? Because the idea that knowledge was somehow lost and then found again later is historically inaccurate. The supposed dark age didn't experience a decline in scholarship and rationality; the existence and characterization of the "dark age" is itself considered a popular myth.
In the Medieval period in Western Europe, technology was indeed lost that the Western Romans had, that later moved over to the East with Constantinople. That technology was reintroduced into the West at a much later date.
I'm not saying technology didn't advance, because obviously one only look at warfare to see that's not true. But it's silly to act like nothing was lost, especially something as simple as basic hygiene, and sewer systems. Obviously this is a problem when a massive empire collapses rapidly, and thus all trade, infrastructure, institutions and population declined rapidly. That led to fractured governments, and no one could really make the effort to do what Rome did for a long time.
We had to wait for Charlameme to actually promote schools and universities again, and promote education, as the only record keeping since Rome fell was Monks in churches.
Also can't forget the blatent fearmongering and hatred for ideas that challenged the churches as well. Wasn't called the dark ages so much because of what was lost, but because of the iron grip that shitty ideas and standards held over any scientific progress at the time.
This is also a myth. In the early middle ages, the church (various sects throughout east and west Europe) was the sole bastion of knowlege and literature following the fall of Rome until the reformation.
1044
« on: February 05, 2017, 03:15:52 PM »
Forget it Jake, it's Sep7agon.
She's my moderator and my admin
Tell that to Zod's snapped neck.
1045
« on: February 05, 2017, 01:13:39 PM »
Are you fucking around? I thought we were roughly the same age.
1046
« on: February 05, 2017, 06:48:08 AM »
I really liked Gervais' rebuttal of the "science is just a different god" argument - that if you destroyed all religious texts they'd never resurface, but that if you destroyed all scientific texts, they'd eventually start to be rediscovered.
It's already happened once with the Medieval times to the Renaissance in Europe.
Is this referring to the popular conception of the dark ages? Because the idea that knowledge was somehow lost and then found again later is historically inaccurate. The supposed dark age didn't experience a decline in scholarship and rationality; the existence and characterization of the "dark age" is itself considered a popular myth.
1047
« on: February 04, 2017, 07:31:21 PM »
We're some kind of Sep7agon?
1048
« on: February 04, 2017, 10:49:40 AM »
I think the argument about 3000 vs 2999 gods is a bit disingenuous; it's a common belief among theologians (of any creed) that varying religions are simply manifestations of the same god in different cultures
“Basically, you deny one less interpretation of god than I do,” he said. “You don’t believe in 2,999 interpretations of god. And I don’t believe in just one more.”
There you go.
There's a massive chasm between believing any sort of deity exists, and not; much less so for believing one characterization of a deity exists, rather than a selection of others.
1049
« on: February 03, 2017, 07:33:09 PM »
I had two jobs in college. It wasn't a smart choice.
1050
« on: February 03, 2017, 07:26:18 PM »
Pretty excellent movie tbh
It's great so far, but Spoiler the poor dog 
Pages: 1 ... 333435 3637 ... 270
|
Show Posts
